Welcome to politics, son!
The Clintons were victims of witch hunts during the entire 8-year tenure (Whitewater, Flowers, et al), yet were able to resolve the national debt and the country prospered.
Bush has been backed for most of his tenure, yet the national debt is worse than it was pre-Clinton, and middle class people cannot survive the rising inflation, interest rates and cost of living.
And Afghanistan and Iraq, it was unpatriotic to question the administration's decisions towards waging war in these countries.
Now that there appears to be no end in sight to the resolution of either of these enigmas, people are finally waking up to the idea that supporting your country, yet, speaking out against your present administration is not unpatriotic, but a protected right provided by the First Amendment.
Keep thinking and speaking; many others will hear you, and changes must occur!
2006-08-07 13:16:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by MenifeeManiac 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
A) Affair - Because the Republicans controlled Congress and were pissed at Clinton's victory, couldn't stand the idea of him being president and although the spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money investigating Clinton the only thing they ever came up with was him lying about sex. It was the only thing they had. I don't get why he didn't just refuse to answer the question.
B) Bush Lying not grounds -- Because the Republicans control Congress and Bush has avoided testifying under oath when questioned about build up to Iraq War.
2006-08-07 20:16:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can't believe you are asking this with any seriousness. If you are, you have bought into the left wing garbage so deeply, I don't know if it's worth wasting my time on.
If you are seriously looking for answers to this juxtaposition you pose, update your question with a response to me and I'll spend the time to lay it out for you in terms you can understand. Otherwise, I'll take this as just another shot at the best president (W) America has had in decades from yet another sore losing Bush basher.
On second thought, see dashers comments. I am not going to try to educate the uneducable. Good synopsis dasher. You deserve 10 points but doubt that the asker is honest enough to give them to you. Probably lernt it from Bill.
2006-08-07 20:17:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by scubadiver50704 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, Clinton was guilty of perjury and that was what his impeachment hearings were about. Also, Bush started a war based on premises that his predecessor, and most members of congress believed in (and most of the world too).
Look up UN resolution 1441, November 8, 2002, calling on Iraq to make "an accurate full, final, and complete disclosure" of its WMD programs, and threatening "serious consequences" if it did not comply.
Don't you think if they didn't believe it, the security council would never have passed it???
2006-08-07 20:11:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by dasher 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The issue about Monica Lewinsky was stupid in the first place. I don't care if Clinton lied about it. Monica was an adult, and Bill's and Hilary's marriage is none of my business.
Bush feigns ignorance, so supposedly it wasn't a lie. He uses the "That's what we were told" excuse. They say Congress voted for the war based on the same information. But it was Bush & Co. pushing for it. We're supposed to be able to trust the president.
2006-08-07 21:09:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by grrandram 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Two things you should know.
1) Clinton was not impeached for having an affair. He was impeached for lying to Congress.
2) If you look at the latest polls, more and more Americans now believe there were WMD in Iraq, just as the president said there was.
Get your facts in order, junior, before you start attacking the only guy with enough balls to protect your butt.
2006-08-07 20:15:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by briang731/ bvincent 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
it wasn't about the Sex. It was about what he didn't say under OATH to the grand jury that was wrong.
First president to be held in contempt of court
First president sued for sexual harassment.
First president accused of rape.
Problem areas listed in a memo by Clinton's own lawyer in preparation
for the president's defense: 40
FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES: In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.
I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2 I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1
2006-08-07 20:09:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Boredstiff 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
How could so many politicans be stupid enough to believe an idiot like Bush in the first place without any evidence? Lie or not, Saddam still killed many people, so why should anyone be sorry for him?
2006-08-07 20:19:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Dasher and this is a stupid, uneducated liberal question. Bush started a war to defend our country and protect Iraq!! He isn't too busy worrying about where to stick his willie and then lying about it to stand up and defend the USA!!! ANDDDDDDD.....
If you don't like it - GET OUT!
GOD bless America!
2006-08-07 20:15:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by cyndi71mom 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton was a Democratic. Republican Pres. Jerry Ford, pardoned Nixon BEFORE Nixon was charged which he never was. Remember Watergate?
2006-08-07 20:24:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by GRANNY12GR1 4
·
0⤊
0⤋